Related Experiment Video
Updated: Apr 22, 2026

A Clinical Trial Assessing the Safety, Efficacy, and Delivery of Olive-Oil-Based Three-Chamber Bags for Parenteral Nutrition
Published on: September 20, 2019
The DiReCT study - improving recruitment into clinical trials: a mixed methods study investigating the ethical
David A Richards1, Sarah Ross, Sarah Robens
1University of Exeter Medical School, Haighton Building, St Luke's Campus, Heavitree Road, Exeter EX1 2 LU, UK. d.a.richards@exeter.ac.uk.
Background:
The 'cohort multiple Randomised Controlled Trial' (cmRCT) design has been proposed as a potential solution to poor recruitment into clinical trials. The design randomly selects participants eligible for experimental treatments from a pre-enrolled cohort of patients, recruiting participants to multiple trials from a single cohort. Controls remain unaware of their participation in specific trials.
Methods:
We undertook a mixed methods study to determine the ethical acceptability, the proportion of patients in a routine service consenting to cohort participation, the proportion of these who would consent to being hypothetically randomly selected to receive new treatments, and the views of clinicians on the acceptability of the design. We submitted our cmRCT design for ethical review and recruited participants from people with anxiety and depression attending a community mental health service of twenty-one clinicians. We recorded the proportion of patients who were offered participation in the DiReCT study and the proportion that consented to researcher contact, medical record sharing, and who accepted to be randomly allocated to active treatment procedures in future hypothetical unspecified clinical trials. We used a thematic framework analysis to analyse clinician interviews.
Results:
We obtained a favourable ethical opinion from the UK Health Research Authority. Clinicians approached 131/752 (17%) potentially eligible participants for consent. Of these 131, 84 (64%) initially consented to be contacted by a researcher and all but one consented to being randomised into future trials. We confirmed consent for 71 (54%) of participants approached by clinicians, of whom 69 (53%) consented to being randomised into hypothetical future trials, 9% (69/752) of all potentially eligible patients. The interviewed clinicians described issues impacting on their ability to recruit participants in terms of clinical concerns for patient wellbeing, work pressure, their views of both general research and the specific DiReCT study, and how they viewed patients' responses to being offered participation in the study.
Conclusions:
The cmRCT system offers the potential to improve the recruitment into clinical trials and is acceptable ethically and to many patients. Overcoming the multiple factors driving the difficulties clinicians experience in patient recruitment is likely to require the application of significant implementation science-informed effort.
Insights
The cohort multiple Randomized Controlled Trial (cmRCT) design is ethically acceptable and feasible for improving clinical trial recruitment. Addressing clinician-reported barriers is key to its successful implementation.
Area of Science:
- Clinical Trials Methodology
- Health Services Research
- Mental Health Research
Background:
- Poor participant recruitment hinders clinical trial progress.
- The cohort multiple Randomized Controlled Trial (cmRCT) design offers a novel approach by pre-enrolling a cohort for multiple trials.
- This design aims to streamline recruitment and address patient engagement in research.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the ethical acceptability and patient consent rates for the cmRCT design.
- To assess clinician perspectives on the feasibility and acceptability of the cmRCT approach.
- To identify barriers and facilitators to implementing cmRCT in routine mental health services.
Main Methods:
- A mixed-methods study involving ethical review, patient consent tracking, and clinician interviews.
- Participants were recruited from a community mental health service for anxiety and depression.
- Thematic framework analysis was used for qualitative data from clinician interviews.
Main Results:
- Favorable ethical opinion received from the UK Health Research Authority.
- Clinicians approached 17% of potentially eligible patients; 53% consented to randomization in hypothetical future trials.
- Clinicians cited patient wellbeing concerns, workload, and patient perceptions as recruitment barriers.
Conclusions:
- The cmRCT design demonstrates ethical acceptability and patient willingness to participate, showing potential for improved clinical trial recruitment.
- Implementation requires addressing clinician-identified challenges through targeted implementation science strategies.
- Further efforts are needed to overcome practical barriers faced by clinicians in patient recruitment for trials.
More Related Videos
14:43A Novel Method for Involving Women of Color at High Risk for Preterm Birth in Research Priority Setting
Published on: January 12, 2018
06:28E-Patient Counseling Trial E-PACO: Computer Based Education versus Nurse Counseling for Patients to Prepare for Colonoscopy
Published on: August 1, 2019
Related Concept Videos
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Bioavailability Study Design: Healthy Subjects Versus Patients
Blinding
Study Designs in Epidemiology
Observational studies are those where the researcher does not intervene but rather observes natural variations. They include cross-sectional, cohort, and...